|
A monetary system exists in RBE, it's called "resources" instead of "money," which is the point you can't get into your head. Everything else is identical to Marxism.
Access not ownership, Monetary system have ownership as currency. You will have access to things without a pricetag and we have the resources to create abundance in everything you use comfortorble at the moment lets move from there.
SOLVED
Just too tiresome. Why were there technology-based improvements? Let's not forget advances in technique and fertilizers and pesticides. Why did those advances occur?
Im more intressted in all the technology not being improved because of the monetary system. And peole dont typical contribute to society for monetary incentive check page 1 (What incentives us video)
SOLVED
1. The source is not questionable, I understand you think it's questionable because your mind operates at a very shallow level, but that doesn't make it so. The source is basing opinion off of hard data, deal with it. 2. Again, why were there technology based improvements? Magic?
IRRELEVANT IGNORED.
Why is there inequality in army strength?
Again, no the source is not questionable, you just throw that out there because you have nothing to say.
Shadow wars is another joke of a contention, please address the real point: the drop in both the size and number of armed conflicts, "shadow" or not.
The ability today to enslave using debt is how most wars are waged today and if you look at a map of the world war and all the countriess indebt you will see we have more war then ever, But disregarding debt war period for the sake of it, We see that our advanced technology logistic abilities offer such overwhelming force coupled with economic ties and an reluctant to go to war western world you get relative peace. Dont get this confused with the reason we have peace is the monetary system because it is in fact resource allocation that is one of the main underlying reasons for war.
Economic hitman(Longer more intressting version with data exists aswel) + Show Spoiler +
SOLVED
So how are you going to reduce population? Forced sterilization, forced abortion, or forced termination?
I dont see no reason to reduce the population, i see it as we will have a bigger issue maintaining our population in this system rather then overpopulating. It looks like it will stagnate at 10 billion.
http://zeitnewsblog.blogspot.se/2011/03/meeting-human-needs-how-resource-based.html
SOLVED
RBE's plans are not proven to work and have disregarded how much resources will be needed to achieve that goal.
Current production of food: 11,000 kg of vegetables per acre. RBE's plan: 1.8 to 3 million kg/acre.
Seems a bit suspicious
+ Show Spoiler + According to the CIA World Factbook, the total land area of Earth is 148.94 million square kilometers, with 17.34 million square kilometers used for crop production. In 2007, the US produced approximately 11,000 kg of vegetables per acre. According to the Institute of Simplified Hydroponics, a group of impoverished children in India has developed a 20 square meter hydroponic garden that produces 730 kg/year(1). If these yields were scaled to a full acre, those yields could increase to ~147,000 kg/acre(2). Using orbitropism, increased CO2 concentrations in the air, and LED lighting, yields could theoretically increase to between ~800,000 to ~1,500,000 kg/acre(3). By adding fulvic acid and gibberellin, yields could increase further. Aeroponic variants have demonstrated an 80% increase in production on top of standard hydroponic yields. With these estimates, it is theoretically possible to produce between 1.8 to 3 million kg/acre(4) – between 180 to 300 times 2007 production, enough to feed a few thousand people every year – and with vertical farming, these yields could be increased linearly. If 4.2 billion acres(5) were required to produce 1.3 thousand kg of food for each living person in 2007, the amount of land used for agricultural means could be dramatically reduced to as little as 3.5 million acres without stacking crops(6), to 1.75 million acres using 2 stacks(6), to 700,000 acres using 5 stacks(6), to 350,000 acres using 10 stacks(6), etc. Using advanced aeroponic facilities and vertical farming, it is physically possible to feed an entire city of up to a million people using only 10 acres of land and 50 stacks(7) – if the population increases, simply add more vertical stacks.
I hate reading walls of texts myself you can find it on here in easier to read it also offers sources and information about the technolgies used to make it easier to understand the technological jargon.
http://zeitnewsblog.blogspot.se/2011/03/meeting-human-needs-how-resource-based.html
SOLVED
Canadas economic model is copied on the US.
Canada has vastly diffrent legislation social values and is "closer" to a nordic model based social democracy You should know this shame on you.
SOLVED
|
In DeliCiousVP's posts SOLVED = zero facts just propaganda.
EVERY TIME.
SOLVED
|
Access not ownership, Monetary system have ownership as currency. You will have access to things without a pricetag and we have the resources to create abundance in everything you use comfortorble at the moment lets move from there.
SOLVED
The Zeitgeist Movement website makes it clear that an "access" society as opposed to a "monetary" society will have artificial scarcity through the "access" system. To make "efficient" (arbitrary) use of resources possible.
Im more intressted in all the technology not being improved because of the monetary system. And peole dont typical contribute to society for monetary incentive check page 1 (What incentives us video)
SOLVED
Why has there been more technological improvement in the last 100 years than in the rest of history combined if the monetary system prevents technological improvement?
The second sentence is just plain wrong, people contribute to society by working for themselves for the monetary incentive. Anyone saying anything else is deluding themselves or their audience. People work to sustain and improve themselves and their situation and through some mysterious mechanism you don't understand (magic?) this creates enough abundance (another thing you don't understand) that there are people who can devote their mental and physical labor solely to helping others. Do you think that was the case 10,000 years ago?
The ability today to enslave using debt is how most wars are waged today and if you look at a map of the world war and all the countriess indebt you will see we have more war then ever, But disregarding debt war period for the sake of it, We see that our advanced technology logistic abilities offer such overwhelming force coupled with economic ties and an reluctant to go to war western world you get relative peace. Dont get this confused with the reason we have peace is the monetary system because it is in fact resource allocation that is one of the main underlying reasons for war.
Still not addressing point, please explain in the face of bare facts that armed conflicts are smaller in size and lesser in numbers your contention that we have more war than ever.
SOLVED
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/26/AR2006022601265.html http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2041/ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/19/business/yourmoney/19confess.html?_r=1&ex=1298005200&en=59c686e6f96b0421&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss http://www.america.gov/st/washfile-english/2006/February/20060202155604atlahtnevel6.165713e-02.html
Economic Hitman is a fucking joke.
|
On May 17 2012 13:40 JonnyBNoHo wrote: In DeliCiousVP's posts SOLVED = zero facts just propaganda.
EVERY TIME.
SOLVED
Every time I read it I imagine Al Gore in South Park:
"EX-CELS-EEYORE, children!"
|
The Zeitgeist Movement website makes it clear that an "access" society as opposed to a "monetary" society will have artificial scarcity through the "access" system. To make "efficient" (arbitrary) use of resources possible.
Good point, obviously we will still have scarce materials like diamonds for example and certain resources(Usualy not goods period) for research will need a sort of artificial scarcity to preserve and pririotize. It is a complicated issue that should be adress on a case to case basis. This spawns a whole range of other questions that i cannot fully answer because i simply dont know.
PENDING
Why has there been more technological improvement in the last 100 years than in the rest of history combined if the monetary system prevents technological improvement?
The second sentence is just plain wrong, people contribute to society by working for themselves for the monetary incentive. Anyone saying anything else is deluding themselves or their audience. People work to sustain and improve themselves and their situation and through some mysterious mechanism you don't understand (magic?) this creates enough abundance (another thing you don't understand) that there are people who can devote their mental and physical labor solely to helping others. Do you think that was the case 10,000 years ago?
Technology breeds more techology as it free people from the burdon of physical labor, But without labour you cannot make money in a monetary system thus it is an enemy of the system this is why our current monetary system stagnates technology.
If you think for a second that acquiring wealth magicly generates technology you are very wrong you look at the surface unable to understand deeper mechanics. I will offer one last thought exercise before dismissing this point again.
Were the first flint axe invented for money?
SOLVED DISMISSED
Still not addressing point, please explain in the face of bare facts that armed conflicts are smaller in size and lesser in numbers your contention that we have more war than ever.
because of the mutual understand of the destruction possible and the public discontent it causes.
SOLVED COMPILED:
|
On May 17 2012 13:53 DeliCiousVP wrote:Show nested quote +Why has there been more technological improvement in the last 100 years than in the rest of history combined if the monetary system prevents technological improvement?
The second sentence is just plain wrong, people contribute to society by working for themselves for the monetary incentive. Anyone saying anything else is deluding themselves or their audience. People work to sustain and improve themselves and their situation and through some mysterious mechanism you don't understand (magic?) this creates enough abundance (another thing you don't understand) that there are people who can devote their mental and physical labor solely to helping others. Do you think that was the case 10,000 years ago? Technology breeds more techology as it free people from the burdon of physical labor, But without labour you cannot make money in a monetary system thus it is an enemy of the system this is why our current monetary system stagnates technology.
Completely false. It's been pointed out to be completely false many, many times.
Capitalism creates wealth - more resources for more technological advancements. Money provides an evaluation system to decide which technology is more efficient (uses less resources).
Hence capitalist societies have better technology and a wider diffusion of technology.
|
On May 17 2012 13:53 DeliCiousVP wrote:Show nested quote +The Zeitgeist Movement website makes it clear that an "access" society as opposed to a "monetary" society will have artificial scarcity through the "access" system. To make "efficient" (arbitrary) use of resources possible. Good point, obviously we will still have scarce materials like diamonds for example and certain resources(Usualy not goods period) for research will need a sort of artificial scarcity to preserve and pririotize. It is a complicated issue that should be adress on a case to case basis. This spawns a whole range of other questions that i cannot fully answer because i simply dont know. PENDING Show nested quote +Why has there been more technological improvement in the last 100 years than in the rest of history combined if the monetary system prevents technological improvement?
The second sentence is just plain wrong, people contribute to society by working for themselves for the monetary incentive. Anyone saying anything else is deluding themselves or their audience. People work to sustain and improve themselves and their situation and through some mysterious mechanism you don't understand (magic?) this creates enough abundance (another thing you don't understand) that there are people who can devote their mental and physical labor solely to helping others. Do you think that was the case 10,000 years ago? Technology breeds more techology as it free people from the burdon of physical labor, But without labour you cannot make money in a monetary system thus it is an enemy of the system this is why our current monetary system stagnates technology. If you think for a second that acquiring wealth magicly generates technology you are very wrong you look at the surface unable to understand deeper mechanics. I will offer one last thought exercise before dismissing this point again. Were the first flint axe invented for money? SOLVED DISMISSED Show nested quote +Still not addressing point, please explain in the face of bare facts that armed conflicts are smaller in size and lesser in numbers your contention that we have more war than ever. because of the mutual understand of the destruction possible and the public discontent it causes. SOLVED COMPILED:
You never answer the question of how people will be motivated to continue working. And don't respond "they can motivate themselves" or something, because then hardly anyone would work in this system because everything is pretty much up to you if you want it or not because it's all free.
Acquiring wealth does mean a more technologically advanced civilization; look at Europe in the colonial period. I fail to see a counterexample where technology has arisen without the means of resources already held or without the ability for the technology to generate money for its owners, both being purposes of a financial system. You could argue the system you want has no data to suggest that such advances will still occur in a new economy, but that's just simply begging the question, which is a silly method of argument referred to as a fallacy.
|
Completely false. It's been pointed out to be completely false many, many times.
Incorrect
IGNORED
Capitalism creates wealth - more resources for more technological advancements
Remove wealth from your comment and your right.
SOLVED
Acquiring wealth does mean a more technologically advanced civilization; look at Europe in the colonial period
Change the word wealth with resources and your correct remember wealth is just a tool they used to extort coupled with raw force.
SOLVED
|
because of the mutual understand of the destruction possible and the public discontent it causes.
SOLVED COMPILED:
Still not addressing the point, you have now defined war down from an objective state of war existing to a subjective fear of war.
Technology breeds more techology as it free people from the burdon of physical labor, But without labour you cannot make money in a monetary system thus it is an enemy of the system this is why our current monetary system stagnates technology.
If you think for a second that acquiring wealth magicly generates technology you are very wrong you look at the surface unable to understand deeper mechanics. I will offer one last thought exercise before dismissing this point again.
Were the first flint axes invented for money?
SOLVED DISMISSED
Why does technology breed more technology? Why was technology "bred" in the first place?
Why was the first flint axe invented? To... acquire wealth? Was the first flint axe wealth?
You also aren't going to do a good job of convincing people with these weird SOLVED DISMISSED IGNORED COMPILED pseudo-technical pronouncements... you aren't a computer k
Remove wealth from your comment and your right.
SOLVED
Wealth and money are not synonyms...
|
Why does technology breed more technology? Why was technology "bred" in the first place?
we can only speculate what caused the absolute first technological advancement, a coincident i would think but what causes is now is access to an ever expanding knowledge database coupled with just the emergent part of the universe.
SOLVED
Why was the first flint axe invented? To... acquire wealth? Was the first flint axe wealth? It was a tool.
SOLVED
You also aren't going to do a good job of convincing people with these weird SOLVED DISMISSED IGNORED COMPILED pseudo-technical pronouncements... you aren't a computer k
Just makes it easier for me to go back and check the points i discussed i could exchanged SOLVED with answered even tho i feel that it dont work as well also expresses my intention and saves time communication is key.. lol
SOLVED
|
Why are you guys humoring him?
|
we can only speculate what caused the absolute first technological advancement, a coincident i would think but what causes is now is access to an ever expanding knowledge database coupled with just the emergent part of the universe.
SOLVED
The same thing caused the first as what causes them now... a drive to acquire wealth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth
It was a tool.
SOLVED
It was also wealth.
|
e same thing caused the first as what causes them now... a drive to acquire wealth.
It was also wealth.
Lets end this, What is wealth?
|
On May 17 2012 15:18 DeliCiousVP wrote:Show nested quote +e same thing caused the first as what causes them now... a drive to acquire wealth. Lets end this, What is wealth?
Anything material that humans possess that they place a value on. This value does not have to be monetary.
|
On May 17 2012 15:18 DeliCiousVP wrote:Show nested quote +e same thing caused the first as what causes them now... a drive to acquire wealth. Lets end this, What is wealth?
Accumulation of good and services.
|
On May 17 2012 15:22 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 17 2012 15:18 DeliCiousVP wrote:e same thing caused the first as what causes them now... a drive to acquire wealth. It was also wealth.
Lets end this, What is wealth? Accumulation of good and services.
Its the middle-man to goods and services that we no longer need, Its a diffrent world now our technology,enviroment and social education is demanding a shift just like we demanded a shift back in the revolutionary days. Wealth will only cause further inequality and profit based corruption we dont need it and we havent for alot of years. Ever since we had the technology to produce food for every person on this planet our monetary system started becoming obsolete.
SOLVED
|
I can't believe Delicious VP is back here keeping this thread alive with his blabber, even though this post is helping keep the thread alive, he has not responded to any of my posts.
One, how do you solve the problem of scarce resources? If resources weren't scarce we wouldn't need money, but do not have an infinite amount of everything so there needs to be a monetary system set up to value these scarce items. And don't say that mining asteroids will solve the problem, I'm no astronomy expert but after talking to my engineer friend who is working at CERN in Switzerland this summer, he says minable asteroids don't come around Earth very often and when they do it is still incredibly expensive and would use lots of resources to get to them. He says mining the moon would be a a better solution but the moon nor asteroids have the infinite resources this system would need.
Two, How do you expect technology to grow without motivation? What do you think inventors like Thomas Edison and Alexander Grahm Bell were motivated by? Fame, and fortune. Who will have the motivation to study to be a scientist when they could ave all they need playing SC2 every day, I know i wouldn't.
Third and final question, how do you deal with trolls? They exist in teamliquid and they will surely exist in this new system, even if we condition our children to somehow not want more than their neighbor, which I argue is part of human nation and why we fought even as cave men. Trolls in the converted society will take more free stuff than they need, just because they are trolls.
This system and your system, Delicious, is simply impossible for the forseeable future, maybe one day if we can find efficient, cheap, easy to produce energy, this can be a possibility but I don't see that happening any time soon. Just look at simmilar societies set up like this, Robert Owen's Utopia failed, Communist Russia, failed (many starving), Communist China, failed (many starving, Mao responsible for more deaths than Hitler and Stalin) and converted to capitalism, North Korea, many starving. Look at the precedent and you know this will not work, its not very hard to grasp, I don't think I can convince delicious to change his ways but maybe I can get him to stop posting and end this ridiculous thread.
|
Its the middle-man to goods and services that we no longer need, Its a diffrent world now our technology,enviroment and social education is demanding a shift just like we demanded a shift back in the revolutionary days. Wealth will only cause further inequality and profit based corruption we dont need it and we havent for alot of years. Ever since we had the technology to produce food for every person on this planet our monetary system started becoming obsolete.
You aren't removing the middle man, you're replacing him with an "access center" owned and operated by the government, guaranteed to bring more inequality and corruption as it always has.
|
Reading threads like this and seeing so many people ignorant of the tragic mistakes of history is very unsettling. I still have faith that common sense will prevail.
|
I can't believe this troll thread is still going. I wish it would be closed to the idiots posting in it wouldn't take up a top forum spot.
|
|
|
|